64 NATURAL SCIENCE. j ULY , 



ethics among Indians and Greeks; and the end, when the "malady of 

 thought" brings the conception of good against the evil of the cosmic 

 process, is Nirvana or Apatheia — salvation sought in absolute 

 renunciation. 



In the modern world, the scientific optimism of a few years ago 

 is falling before a frank pessimism. Cosmic evolution is accountable 

 for both good and evil, but knowledge of it provides no better reason 

 than earlier speculation for choosing the good. The survival of the 

 fittest does not mean the survival of the best, but of the best adapted 

 to the conditions. The cosmic process is not only non-moral, but 

 immoral; goodness does not lead to success in it, and laws and 

 moral precepts are directed to the curbing of it. Still, Professor 

 Huxley sees a way out of absolute pessimism. Society remains 

 subject to the cosmic process, but the less as civilisation advances 

 and ethical man can combat it. The history of civilisation shows 

 that we have some hope of this, for when physiology, psychology, 

 ethics, and political science, now befogged by crude anticipations and 

 futile analogies, have emerged from their childhood, they may work as 

 much change on human affairs as the earlier-ripened physical sciences 

 wrought on material progress. And so, remembering that the evil 

 cosmic nature in us has the foothold of millions of years, and 

 never hoping to abandon sorrow and pain, we may yet, in the manhood 

 of our race, accept our destiny, and, with clear and steady eyes, address 

 ourselves to the task of living, that we and others may live better. 



It would be absurd to imagine that Professor Huxley considered 

 this eloquent address a reasoned exposition, and indeed many of his 

 own notes supply precisely those remarks which a hostile critic would 

 have been glad to make. The sole occasion of criticism is that the 

 address will have a positive scientific value assigned it. The domi- 

 nant note in the address is that the process of life presents the 

 " appearance of cyclical evolution." The " value of a strong intellec- 

 tual grasp of the nature of this process lies in the circumstance that 

 what is true of the bean is true of living things in general." This 

 is really an argument from analogy, and has no value in a construc- 

 tive system. The politician addressing those who agree with him, or 

 the preacher strengthening his hearers in the faith which they share 

 with him, use analogies with right and reason. But they are essen- 

 tially rhetorical appeals. They become arguments only when by 

 reason of some definite identity in the subjects compared they cease 

 to be analogies. The Professor in his first note (on the word "appear- 

 ance " in the sentence just quoted) shows that he introduces the 

 example of the bean-plant as a mere analogy. The actual process 

 true of all living things is not a cyclical but a linear evolution. A 

 continuous chain stretches from every living being to the distant and 

 prodigious first appearance of life. The successive individuals are 

 pendants of the chain, and, dropping off, leave it unbroken. 



Professor Huxley makes too much of the shifting impermanence 



